Misch:willfullyobscure: We saw the exact same thing happen blossom under Clinton, though the violent fringe right really started in the early ninities in response to GHWB and "new world order" paranoia,, and it culminated in OKC, Erc Rudoplh and eventually Columbine. (/11 was really what put a stop to it for about a decade, and Obama's election concided with the resurgence of domestic hate groups, but in a macro sense, its not that he's black, although that doesn't hurt, its that he represents a threatening federal power and we don't really have an external enemy to unite us right now. the USA has a long, long history of violent radicalism across the political spectrum and it only ever goes away when we have a moment of cultural unity, like a war or an economic boom that raises everyone's fortunes, and that hasn't happened since the late 70's.

Stretches back to John Birch and anti-catholic rhetoric surrounding the JFK presidency too.

And, oh, look, another Koch reference. Koch involved in the founding of the John Birch Society.

somedude210:adamgreeney: So you're saying that McVeigh wouldn't have committed OKC without Waco, and would have just carried on with his life and been a happy dude? Come on. Anyone willing to commit murder on that scale is farked up to begin with. He would have found another "justification" for his acts. You're better than this.

whoa whoa whoa, I merely pointed out that waco was McVeigh's motivation (his words). He'd probably find something else, but that was his "last straw"

I realize. It was Derpin_in_Anson who said we wouldn't have had OKC without Waco. I'm with you, the guy would have found some justification for what he did

FloydA:How many members should a group have before you feel it's worth considering it a hate group? Is "number of members" a good criterion for that?

I'm thinking "more than two" is a good starting point. I wouldn't consider a group worth mentioning until it had at least a dozen members, to be honest.

When you get down to it, though, a lot of those "groups" are really just splinters from previous organizations. The Klan is a good example: most of those multiple Klan groups listed are much smaller groups that split off from the old-school Klan over the years - and each time they splintered, they lost total membership. Usually, when you split a hundred-person group, you end up with two groups totaling much fewer people - often less than half of the original.

When the group most people think of as "The KKK" was at its peak in the 1920s, it had as many as six million members. It was basically one big group, with lots of chapters. Nowadays, there are dozens of completely separate "Klan" groups in the US - with about 5,000 members, combined. But each time one of those chapters splits, the SPLC notes it as an "increase in hate groups," instead of mentioning that total membership is still dropping.

Heck, one of the "hate groups" SPLC lists is a blog by a woman who criticizes Islam. Listed as a "hate group," and it's one person. Not a particularly hateful blog, either - mostly, it's just stuff that CAIR dislikes.

1) Waco was not his only motivation..he also cited other incidents, and he attempted to forge links with Elohim City in OK. 2) It might not be the best policy to take mass murderers immediately at their word without some sort of suspicion.

I'm thinking it would have removed one of his primary motivators (Ruby Ridge was another)

EyeballKid:And had those evil dogs not corrupted sweet, impressionable David Berkowitz.

Not even in the same ballpark, son.

somedude210:McVagh said that what the government did at Waco inspired him to commit OC

I know. Quoting you was directed to the guy that called me (and ostensibly you) a "halfwit" and accusing us of somehow defending McVeigh for pointing out that he did indeed state that Waco was one of his motivations.

cirby:Heck, one of the "hate groups" SPLC lists is a blog by a woman who criticizes Islam. Listed as a "hate group," and it's one person. Not a particularly hateful blog, either

Fark is well aware of Pamela Geller and her activism in the "Conservative" movement. In the age of the Internet, evil charismatic people can amass quite a following. You can ask Grover Norquist about that.

Dancin_In_Anson:adamgreeney: So you're saying that McVeigh wouldn't have committed OKC without Waco

I'm thinking it would have removed one of his primary motivators (Ruby Ridge was another)

EyeballKid: And had those evil dogs not corrupted sweet, impressionable David Berkowitz.

Not even in the same ballpark, son.

somedude210: McVagh said that what the government did at Waco inspired him to commit OC

I know. Quoting you was directed to the guy that called me (and ostensibly you) a "halfwit" and accusing us of somehow defending McVeigh for pointing out that he did indeed state that Waco was one of his motivations.

And you don't think he would have found another motivation? Really? He would have just moved on and never planted a bomb?

Listen, I know as a crazy person it's hard to dissect how your people think, but he was intent on mass murder. He would have found another "reason." Waco really had nothing to do with it. There would have been another event or "slight" that he would have picked up and carried out the bombing anyway.

Somacandra:Yeah I saw the Nation of Islam on there. They have a worship/social center in Memphis. But mostly they bake a lot of bean pies, advocate diet reform and complain about Whitey. Farrakhan's tirades against 'Jews' are straight out of the New Testament, like a lot of psuedo-Christian groups. I guess I'm not as concerned with them at this time.

Wow - you don't know much of anything about Nation of Islam or Farrakhan, do you?

Somacandra:Fark is well aware of Pamela Geller and her activism in the "Conservative" movement. In the age of the Internet, evil charismatic people can amass quite a following. You can ask Grover Norquist about that.

...and yet, she's still one person, and listed by the SPLC as a "group."

One person is not a "group," no matter how much you want there to be a Great Right Wing Extremist Conspiracy.

She's mean-spirited, and generally crazy and conspiracy-mongering, but still... not a group.

EyeballKid:Dancin_In_Anson: He had it in Ruby Ridge as well. I just think that Waco pushed him over the edge.

Why is it the bootstrappiest of the bootstrappy are always the first to scapegoat the government for their own problems? What happened to rugged individualism?

Look, the guy whose highest paying job was as a basic Sergeant (E-5), and whose housing and food allowances were non-taxable, and who didn't have ANY of his pay taxed while serving in the Gulf War, due to the Combat Zone Tax Exclusion, was just being crushed to death by high taxes.

The Muthaship:what_now: The Westboro Baptist Church doesn't advocate violence either.

They are more of a hate the sinner and the sin group, it seems to me. The FRC, deluded as they are, seems like they are just against the sin.

The FRC lobbied congress to NOT pass a resolution decrying the Ugandan "kill the gays" bill (now the "imprison gays for life") bill. Tony Perkins has also praised the Ugandan President for his stands on morality, though he denies that it's about this particular set of morality in particular.

They may not actively be advocating killing gay people, but they are treading into "won't someone rid me of these meddlesome queers" territory.

cirby:Heck, one of the "hate groups" SPLC lists is a blog by a woman who criticizes Islam. Listed as a "hate group," and it's one person. Not a particularly hateful blog, either - mostly, it's just stuff that CAIR dislikes.

You don;t consider the content that Pam Geller rights "particularly hateful". Have you read it?

cirby:Somacandra:Yeah I saw the Nation of Islam on there. They have a worship/social center in Memphis. But mostly they bake a lot of bean pies, advocate diet reform and complain about Whitey. Farrakhan's tirades against 'Jews' are straight out of the New Testament, like a lot of psuedo-Christian groups. I guess I'm not as concerned with them at this time.

Wow - you don't know much of anything about Nation of Islam or Farrakhan, do you?

Here's the SPLC's take on Nation of Islam: Link

...and to save some time, here's the New Black Panther Party, which is becoming more heavily affiliated/intertwined with the Nation of Islam: Link

I know nothing about the New Black Panther Party, other than that a couple of black guys were hanging out at a polling station someplace. In my book, they're a farking joke. The Nation of Islam, OTH, is bad shiat. From time to time, recordings of speeches or sermons by Farrakhan have come my way. They're good entertainment, as he truly is utterly, completely, batshiat crazy. You wonder how people sitting in the pews at the "mosque" can keep a straight face, but then in one he started praising Elijah Mohammed for having people killed for perceived insufficient zeal. It wasn't just Malcolm X, it was guys who didn't sell enough literature. The non-laughter began to make a shade more sense.

The Muthaship:You guys really can't take a little dissent in the CJ, can you?

Farkers are mostly fine with dissent. However, if you can't give an well-informed, evidence-based, logically reasoned basis for the dissent, they won't dignify your position with anything beyond mockery and LOL-cat pictures.

cameroncrazy1984:So what you're saying is that he had multiple reasons to do it and he probably would have done it anyway?

Well, when I said "I just think that Waco pushed him over the edge." The answer to your question is no. Thanks for playing though.

adamgreeney:And you don't think he would have found another motivation?

I dunno. He was at Waco and watched 76 American citizens get cooked as it happened. If that doesn't bother you a little, you're one farked up individual. I guess it more than bothered him. But once again...does this justify his actions? Not in any way, shape or form.

The Muthaship:Satanic_Hamster: The Muthaship: SPLC requirements for being labeled a hate group:

1. Fail to fully support the agenda of the SPLC with every word and deed.

Citation please.

There are tons of articles that cover it. But, this is my opinion. You are not obligated to either read the articles nor agree with me. The FRC made the list for being advocates of traditional marriage. That led to a shooting. But, the list is a cash cow for the SPLC, so it grows.

You mean the same FRC that publishes documents advocating the death penalty for homosexuality and provides "documentation" that homosexuals want to abolish age of consent laws because deep down they're all pedophiles?

Yeah, that's a bit more than "being advocates for traditional marriage."

Dancin_In_Anson:adamgreeney: And you don't think he would have found another motivation?

I dunno. He was at Waco and watched 76 American citizens get cooked as it happened. If that doesn't bother you a little, you're one farked up individual.

If that inspires you to blame the government (instead of the lunatic cult leader who intentionally martyred himself and his followers) and blow up a building, then you're an even MORE farked up individual.

Lord Dimwit:You mean the same FRC that publishes documents advocating the death penalty for homosexuality and provides "documentation" that homosexuals want to abolish age of consent laws because deep down they're all pedophiles?

Yeah, that's a bit more than "being advocates for traditional marriage."

Notice that the Douche/trollship disappeared from the thread after people started giving examples. "But he's not defending them."

SPLC haters; come on, you can do better then this. SURELY you can find good examples of non-hate groups that were falsely labeled as hate groups.

mediablitz:So Dancin_In_Anson admits he thinks the OKC bombing was justified.

mediablitz:Except when asked if Waco justified his actions just a few posts earlier, you said yes.

Show your work.

LordJiro:If that inspires you to blame the government (instead of the lunatic cult leader who intentionally martyred himself and his followers) and blow up a building, then you're an even MORE farked up individual.

But considering how the internet has become a giant witchhunt for "racists", I think the goalposts were just moved in a little to make it a little easier. "Racist" now includes not only all republicans, but even nominal independents like myself who value sh*t President Obama doesn't. Like fiscal responsibility, keeping campaign promises, and muh freedoms. Because if you aren't an apologist for Obama's incompetence, you're part of a f*cking hate group.

Dancin_In_Anson:cameroncrazy1984: So what you're saying is that he had multiple reasons to do it and he probably would have done it anyway?

Well, when I said "I just think that Waco pushed him over the edge." The answer to your question is no. Thanks for playing though.

adamgreeney: And you don't think he would have found another motivation?

I dunno. He was at Waco and watched 76 American citizens get cooked as it happened. If that doesn't bother you a little, you're one farked up individual. I guess it more than bothered him. But once again...does this justify his actions? Not in any way, shape or form.

abb3w:Farkers are mostly fine with dissent. However, if you can't give an well-informed, evidence-based, logically reasoned basis for the dissent, they won't dignify your position with anything beyond mockery and LOL-cat pictures.

gaybBut considering how the internet has become a giant witchhunt for "racists", I think the goalposts were just moved in a little to make it a little easier. "Racist" now includes not only all republicans, but even nominal independents like myself who value sh*t President Obama doesn't. Like fiscal responsibility, keeping campaign promises, and muh freedoms. Because if you aren't an apologist for Obama's incompetence, you're part of a f*cking hate group.

Klansmen coming to Memphis to rally March 30th will not be allowed to wear their infamous hoods, which many in the city believe will stop a large showing of the KKK, but the SPLC says Klansmen will still come, regardless."Many states have anti-masking laws. Most Klansmen are used to this," said Potok.

Anti masking laws? Never new this was a thing. How the heck is that even legal?

But considering how the internet has become a giant witchhunt for "racists", I think the goalposts were just moved in a little to make it a little easier. "Racist" now includes not only all republicans, but even nominal independents like myself who value sh*t President Obama doesn't. Like fiscal responsibility, keeping campaign promises, and muh freedoms. Because if you aren't an apologist for Obama's incompetence, you're part of a f*cking hate group.

somedude210:Dancin_In_Anson: Funny you mention those two. Tell me what happened to the guy on the right and how that may have inspired the one on the left.

Have you ever read Them: Adventures with Extremists? It's a good book and sums this stuff up nicely.

But I won't deny that OC was inspired by Waco

I'm pretty sure it was inspired by The Turner Diaries, with a sprinkling of Ruby Ridge and a dash of Waco. I know it was the Waco anniversary, but I bet McVeigh would try to kill Koresh if we ThunderDomed them.